User talk:Seemecoming

Misuse of WP:RFPP

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

expand, dont just say my edits are unconstructive. Where were they unconstructive? Seemecoming (talk) 19:22, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The WP:RFPP board isn't for attacking other editors and making groundless COI accusations. Any further disruption of that nature will result in an immediate block. You can make suggestions for chagnes on the talk page of the protected article, but we're not going to unprotect it given the recent activity on it. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:24, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

nice "groundless", thats cute. anyways, what exactly is the troubling "recent activity" on it? References being added and then removed for no reason? nice one. Seemecoming (talk) 19:26, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2024

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. RickinBaltimore (talk) 19:31, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

nice evidence you got there genius, "obvious" sockpuppet. Lol. Seemecoming (talk) 19:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Seemecoming (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was blocked after a Admin got his feelings hurt while he was protecting his friend A.S Brown and others, basically I am being accused of sockpuppetry along with whatever else they can come up with, there is no evidence of this as this is my only account, I don't edit from mobile apps. I am being targeted for trying to restore edits which were literally just references, most of which were URL links of news articles on the article "Indo-Cansdian Organized Crime"

Decline reason:

Confirmed sockpuppetry. Yamla (talk) 19:40, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Talk page access is being removed. I'll be blunt: Go away. RickinBaltimore (talk) 19:44, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]